This is my first attempt to create a believable world map. I outlined the Teutonic plates and plate pressure. Please let me know if it makes sense in terms of realism. This is a very rough draft - zero details or refinement.

51147

Diamond

01-10-2013, 08:15 PM

I'm no geologist (or Teutonic expert... ;)), but something about the movement(s) of your plates doesn't seem right to me. They all seem to be 'chasing' each other, moving in the same direction. There's hardly any spots where they are either separating, colliding, or sliding against each other, so how, for example, is that massive island chain in the west being created?

On the other hand, I do like the actual layout of the landmasses themselves quite a bit.

Hai-Etlik

01-10-2013, 10:37 PM

Well, to start with, it's "tectonic", "Teutonic" refers to a historical ethnic group in what is now Germany.

To get the motion right you have to think about everything being on a sphere. You can't just take a flat map and push things around in a flat, Euclidean way and have it work out. A "straight line" on a sphere is actually a circle around the centre of the planet (a great circle), and moving in a straight line is rotation around the centre (in particular it's rotation around a line through the centre and perpendicular to the line between you and the centre).

This is really hard to figure out on a flat map, and the particular kind of flat map is going to make a difference too. A conformal map or a gnomonic map would both have some advantages. Conformal maps preserve angles locally (45° is always 45°) while Gnomonic maps always map great circles to straight lines.

As an example, if a plate covering the pole is moving south on one side, it must be moving north on the other.

If your map is meant to be in a global cylindrical projection, then those faults running into the southeast and southwest corners are actually meeting exactly at the south pole as the entire bottom edge is a single point. They are also meeting at an infinitesimal angle. Essentially, an infinitely sharp point. You would also need to match up faults across the discontinuity at the edges which at the moment you haven't.

ukie

01-11-2013, 04:35 AM

Well, to start with, it's "tectonic", "Teutonic" refers to a historical ethnic group in what is now Germany.

Sorry sometimes spell-check is not your friend but your worst enemy. I think you also meant to say "...what is now Denmark..." not Germany, since Teutons, a Germanic tribe came from Jutland which is presently Denmark... but that's totally off the subject, right? ;)

To get the motion right you have to think about everything being on a sphere. You can't just take a flat map and push things around in a flat, Euclidean way and have it work out. A "straight line" on a sphere is actually a circle around the centre of the planet (a great circle), and moving in a straight line is rotation around the centre (in particular it's rotation around a line through the centre and perpendicular to the line between you and the centre).

This is really hard to figure out on a flat map, and the particular kind of flat map is going to make a difference too. A conformal map or a gnomonic map would both have some advantages. Conformal maps preserve angles locally (45° is always 45°) while Gnomonic maps always map great circles to straight lines.

I see what you mean and that's a great idea I'll definitely try gnomonic projection before transferring it to a flat map. I'm just trying to make it as plausible as possible.

If your map is meant to be in a global cylindrical projection, then those faults running into the southeast and southwest corners are actually meeting exactly at the south pole as the entire bottom edge is a single point. They are also meeting at an infinitesimal angle. Essentially, an infinitely sharp point. You would also need to match up faults across the discontinuity at the edges which at the moment you haven't.

Thanks for pointing it out I totally screwed the south pole up.

ukie

01-11-2013, 04:48 AM

I'm no geologist (or Teutonic expert... ;)), but something about the movement(s) of your plates doesn't seem right to me. They all seem to be 'chasing' each other, moving in the same direction. There's hardly any spots where they are either separating, colliding, or sliding against each other, so how, for example, is that massive island chain in the west being created?

On the other hand, I do like the actual layout of the landmasses themselves quite a bit.
Lol I'm sorry to admit but I'm pretty poorly versed in teutonics myself :)

Do you mean to take in account something like mantle's circular movement underneath each plate?

I'll rework it on a sphere and a gnomonic projection map and try again tomorrow.

Thanks for your comment

P.S. Wow. Love your maps. Which program do you use?

ukie

01-11-2013, 01:47 PM

Ok how about this one. I tried it out on a sphere:

51167

DragonLord

01-11-2013, 03:04 PM

Well, it's better but you still have some problems:
plates can't really "expand" themselves like the 10th one.

Take exemple with North America plate for exemple: it's created in the Atlantic, move to left and it hurt the Pacific plate where a mountain is created.

To resume, plates can only move in one direction (but it can be South-South-West for exemple).

I hop you will understand what I mean.

ukie

01-11-2013, 05:14 PM

Well, it's better but you still have some problems:
plates can't really "expand" themselves like the 10th one.

Take exemple with North America plate for exemple: it's created in the Atlantic, move to left and it hurt the Pacific plate where a mountain is created.

To resume, plates can only move in one direction (but it can be South-South-West for exemple).

I hop you will understand what I mean.

Yes I see. Same problem with 5 and 9. So I think if I move 5 W-SW only, 10 S-SW,E, 9 W-SW only it would fix it. I was trying to avoid them chasing each other (what Diamond commented on).